Backup Files Missing From Session Contents Report After 6.1.138

[dickie]

After upgrading to Retrospect 6.1.138, I ran an incremental backup that should backup six new files. The backup ran without errors, but I noticed that the report log did not report enough files being backed up for the disk volume containing those files; i.e. the count of files backed-up was too low.

 

I browsed the "Contents Report" for the backup set and found that the backup session did not list the files as being backed-up.

 

I then attempted to restore the files using an "Immediate Restore" and was able to restore the files. It seems strange that I can restore files that are missing from the backup session contents report.

 

It looks like there may be a bug in the Retrospect 6.1.138 report log and backup session contents report. I don't recall ever seeing this kind of inconsistency between the Retrospect reports and the actual backup contents prior to the 6.1.138 upgrade. This inconsistency makes me a little uneasy about the backup status of my valuable data. Is anyone else seeing this problem?

 

Thanks.

[Mayoff]

Sounds like Retrospect is working exactly as it should.

 

It sounds to me like you do not fully understand the differences between a session and a snapshot.

 

session

A group of files from a SINGLE operation stored within a Backup Set.

 

Snapshot

A Retrospect Snapshot is created during a backup operation to depict a volume’s state (that is, all its files and the folder paths to them). It makes it easy to restore a hard disk to its exact state as of a given backup.

[CallMeDave]

Quote:

---

After upgrading to Retrospect 6.1.138, I ran an incremental backup that should backup six new files. The backup ran without errors, but I noticed that the report log did not report enough files being backed up for the disk volume containing those files; i.e. the count of files backed-up was too low.

 

---

 

I find this post tantalizingly specific, yet at the same time suspiciously incomplete.

 

> I ran an incremental backup that should backup six new files

 

- Why should it have? Were the files newly created since the last Retrospect backup? Were their contents changed?

- Were these the only six files on the Source volume that "should" have been backed up?

 

> I noticed that the ... count of files backed-up was too low

 

How low was it? Were some of the six files accounted for? Is there some reason that the specific numbers aren't being reported here?

 

Robin is right, of course, in his description of Session vs. Snapshot. At the same time, it's true that files that are Matched and Marked for Backup will be part of that backup's Session.

 

So in order to report a bug, it's necessary to provide the specific steps taken, with accurate and complete descriptions of everything that's happening along the way.

 

Dave

(gobble gobble)

[dickie]

Yes, the six files were newly created; i.e. they were newly copied to my machine on 11/18/07. The last time I ran an incremental backup was on 11/17/07. All six had a modification date of 11/18/07 and creation dates ranging from 9/3/07 to 11/5/07. I ran the next incremental backup on 11/20/07.

 

These six files are the ones I know to be missing from the backup session report for the 11/20/07 backup. And the count of files in the log report is only 5, which does match the five files shown in the backup session report of the 11/20/07 session. However, the six new files are not counted in the log nor do they show up in the 11/20/07 backup session contents report.

 

These six files do show up in the 11/20/07 browser snapshot when I do a file restore of those six files from the 11/20/07 backup.

 

Thanks for your help.